Web Server Packed into RJ45 Connector

Good Thing by dreamchaser · 2003-03-13 01:40 · Score: 4, Funny

It's a good thing that the review wasn't hosted on one of these things! They sound really cool, but there's no way they'd handle a slashdotting! Then again...maybe a Beowulf cluster of them would...

These seem cool by Anonymous Coward · 2003-03-13 01:44 · Score: 5, Insightful

Sure, a lot of these devices seem cool (and I'll agree that they are), but to me and others in my line of work they're a security nightmare. Due to the small size, it's not hard build a device that could be hidden inside of a building on a network leaving it open to the person who left it there.

I'd still love to have one to play around with, though!

Re:These seem cool by rtaylor · 2003-03-13 01:57 · Score: 4, Interesting

Can't see why that would bother you. You encrypt everything between the desktop and the server room anyway right? Just like your wireless access?

I bet someone could generally walk in the frontdoor with a laptop and sit in the meeting room to accomplish the same thing without anbody saying anything.

--
Rod Taylor
Re:These seem cool by DickBreath · 2003-03-13 02:35 · Score: 4, Funny

to me and others in my line of work they're a security nightmare. Due to the small size, it's not hard build a device that could be hidden inside of a building on a network leaving it open to the person who left it there.

Because such a computing device can be misused, we need to write our legislators and get these outlawed.

--

I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.

Not that big of a downside... by heldlikesound · 2003-03-13 01:44 · Score: 4, Insightful

Downside is that the serial interface to the controller tops out at 300 kbps

This seems doesn't seem like that big of a deal, for the kind of appications this is targeted for (security system modules, refrigerators, answering machines, etc...) I'd think 300 kbps is more than adaquate, you can even do some streaming video, with a reasonable bit-rate.

--

Cloud City Digital: DVD Production at its cheapest/finest

Forget about stealth Dreamcasts! by Gudlyf · 2003-03-13 01:47 · Score: 4, Insightful

In a previous article, there was talk about the possibility of hackers placing small Dreamcasts on corporate networks for packet sniffing and whatnot. If they can make a webserver as small as an RJ45 connector, what's stopping someone from making one that can spy on the network?

If somehow someone puts one of those in your network closet (or heck, anywhere on the network), good luck finding it -- it's a connector for godsakes!

--
Trolls lurk everywhere. Mod them down.

Re:Forget about stealth Dreamcasts! by Daytona955i · 2003-03-13 02:17 · Score: 4, Interesting

It still needs to connect to your network which means a new light on your hub/switch/router. A regular portscan of your network ip address range would find this, then you can just pull the connection at the other end. I don't think the security concerns are as great as everyone seems to think. I think it would be cool to modify it to integrate a wireless card with it to allow a wider market. I for one don't really feel like running cables into my kitchen.
-Chris
Re:Forget about stealth Dreamcasts! by cgenman · 2003-03-13 02:50 · Score: 4, Interesting

I don't know if noticing a new light will provide any protection... computers here are routinely plugged in and out depending upon agent and client needs, etc, and that portscan erancy might just be a new laptop that somebody plugged in. I would think what you need to do is moniter the traffic out of your network, and prevent anyone from forwarding sniffed packets across your firewall. They might be difficult to detect if the machine had built in ssh, a time-delay, and mimmocked normal traffic use (requesting /. at 10:00 AM, for example).

The best protection against this is that with the above mentioned precaution it is unnecessary. If someone can smuggle themselves into your building, install a piece of hardware onto your network, and smuggle themselves out, then back in and out again to remove the device, why not just install a keylogger onto the back of someone's keyboard and get admin priviledges?

Personally, I'm hoping this gets integrated into webcams. I would love to setup a camera out of the side window of my basement to know when the carpool has come, but really don't feel like putting a full server into that environment.

--
The ______ Agenda
Re:Forget about stealth Dreamcasts! by DickBreath · 2003-03-13 03:57 · Score: 5, Interesting

It still needs to connect to your network which means a new light on your hub/switch/router.

You're right. This is a major drawback.

What we need is help from some hardware hackers. Surely someone skilled with electronics could build a, say, calculator sized board, duct taped to a square 6-volt lantern battery, that would have both the function of a hub and a packet sniffer using a small embedded microcontroller.

The way I propose building it, such a device would plug between an ethernet jack and a computer. It would install inline. (Although my proposed construction method is too bulky to be hidden inline, but the construction price is right. So it needs to go "inline" up in the suspended ceiling.

Since it is inline, it doesn't "take up" an ethernet port. It piggybacks on a legitimate device that is entitled to have a network connection.

A regular portscan of your network ip address range would find this, then you can just pull the connection at the other end.

Not true. Just because the thing listens on ethernet does not mean it needs to respond to portscans. Heck, it doesn't even have to have an IP address. It doesn't even need to have a MAC address!

Late at night, when the device the sniffer is piggybacked onto isn't doing anything, our sniffer could then use the same MAC address and IP address as the piggybacked device. Packets sent out from our sniffer could look to the LAN, switches, routers, etc. just like they had come from the piggybacked device. In fact, no reason we couldn't do this during the daytime. Our sniffer would watch for reply packets comming to our MAC and IP address to one of OUR port numbers, and just not relay those packets thru to the piggybacked device whose connection we're leaching from.

Okay, maybe this shouldn't have a "hub", but should really be an embedded computer with TWO ethernet ports. It's normal function is to "transparently" bridge all packets between the two so that it is invisible "inline".

I sure wish such an inline sniffer could be truly small so that it literally could go "inline" between two ethernet cables, connecting them together. But the price of such equipment isn't there yet for most of us.

Another problem that I touched on above is how to power such a device. I mentioned the possibility of battery power. This is fine if you don't want a permanent "bug" in someone's network.

Better is to somehow power it from utility power. A small AC adapter? A very tiny switching power supply on the sniffer's circuit board so that you just use aligator clips to hook into 110v power, such as in some light fixture in the suspended ceiling? (You still need battery backup for "lights off" hours.) Well, maybe just the insides of an AC adapter bolted to your board, with alligator clips for 110v power. Again, the price and ease of construction is right for those of us without NSA style budgets.

I wish I could buy some of the NSA's packet sniffers from ThinkGeek.

Another problem is how does the device communicate to its master? IRC is one possibility. Instant messaging? P2P? What about a P2P that is bandwidth friendly like OpenNap? The device connects to a server, offers several bizzarre files to upload. When one of those files is uploaded, that triggers it to search for and then "download" a file of new commands or firmware. When a different file is requested for upload, the sniffer yields up its booty. Besides IRC or OpenNap, the device could pretend to visit certian web sites. Various URL's of the web site would secretly communicate "bits" of steganographic information. For instance, it visits my "slash" site. It checks the last 64 comments. Which of the 64 comments it checks, communicates a 6-bit value to the web server. Of course, once such a device is discovered, the web server might be implicated. Another possibility is to e-mail various yahoo or hotmail accounts with encrypted infor

--

I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.

Re:I'm wondering by Hulver · 2003-03-13 01:48 · Score: 5, Funny

If you were a fridge manufacturer and wanted to web-enable your fridges, you would buy as many of these as you built fridges.

Imagine being able to check on the temparature of your fridge over the internet. Even install a web cam inside it. Check what groceries you need from work.

Pow. Cheep, web enabled fridge.

The only problem would be script kiddies. I 0wnzers your cuccumber man

--
-- Hulver's site

Re:I'm wondering by cdrudge · 2003-03-13 01:50 · Score: 4, Insightful

Embedded systems. Put one in your toaster, fridge, hair dryer, internal diagnostics on your TV, spa, whatever. It's not meant to be a webserver for a high bandwidth website, but more for controlling some device via a web interface.

They'd make great controllers.. by caveat · 2003-03-13 01:50 · Score: 4, Informative

..for cheap home electronic devices you might want to web-enable (i.e. tell the 100-DVD jukebox to have the following playlist ready when you get home, have the fridge print you out dinner recipies, blah blah blah), but with 512kb of flash for the web pages and a (relatively) slow interface, they certainly wouldn't be useful for serving (and they aren't really being sold as such, despite what the tagline says - the PDF mentions serving, but the main push seems to be monitoring & control..good idea for something like this).

--

Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley

Re:I'm wondering by e8johan · 2003-03-13 01:52 · Score: 5, Insightful

Anything embeddable sells in tens of thousands. Stationary computers are the least produced computer type. Just imagine all microcontrollers in VCRs for example. I'd say that there are far more than 10000 VCRs sold each year. Now embedd a webserver into each VCR, so that you can program the timer over your private LAN. Thats a possible 10000 units. Now put the same protocol in your digital TV reciever/decoder to change channels, update codes, subscribe to PPV shows etc. and let the VCR change the channel of the decoder and you've got another 10k units.

10k is a small number in the embedded world.

Now, for the real price:
"The list price of the XPort is $49.00. Discount pricing on the XPort is also available in volumes of ten thousand."
according to http://www.lantronix.com/news/pr/2003/02-24-xport. html

Re:I'm wondering by amorsen · 2003-03-13 01:54 · Score: 4, Interesting

Ok, imagine your company makes sensors that output their results via RS-232 serial. Or controllers that are given commands via RS-232 serial. Or maybe you have machinery that is programmed through RS-232 serial. Either way, your would like to access those products remotely, and RS-232 just doesn't go very far. Add this thing, and suddenly your products are web-enabled.

The price is a bit high still, but there is a lot of equipment where $33 extra a unit would not scare customers away.

--
Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?

big hairy deal by Lumpy · 2003-03-13 01:56 · Score: 4, Interesting

the Siteplayer is bigger but does more and is easily afforded by nearly anyone at $29.00 in SINGLE QUANTITIES so buy one and mess with it, make the first toaster with an IP address, 10baseT and a web interface (I did. though it was neat, then dismantled it because it was reallllly silly.)

http://www.siteplayer.com/ is the place to go.

If you cant buy the product in single quantities for a very reasonable price, then it's not worth messing with.

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.

A House of Cables... by DasBub · 2003-03-13 02:00 · Score: 4, Funny

Everyone suggests that these could be used in toasters, fridges, etc. etc... But would you actually run cables to all of these devices?

I can just picture Old Man Stevens handing his wife a juicer for her birthday. Old Lady Stevens lets out a little sigh and grabs a crimper and a spool of Cat5.

FIGHT THE FUTURE!

Re:I'm wondering by walt-sjc · 2003-03-13 02:03 · Score: 5, Insightful

At $33 each in quantity, I don't think we are going to see them in toasters anytime soon.

As far as embedded systems goes, this is an order of magnitude or so too expensive. Manufacturers pinch pennies on even larger items like TV's, as each dollar increase in cost translates into something like $5 to the consumer, and potentially millions to the bottom line.

Frankly, this technology isn't even appropriate anyway. For something more in line with the applications you are thinking about, look here where the technology is already imbedded in millions of consumer devices.

Re:Let me get this straight by Saint+Aardvark · 2003-03-13 02:04 · Score: 4, Funny

Where have you got a crapload of RJ45 cables? That's right, an office. What's the biggest driving force behind Internet technologies? That's right, pr0n. So just imagine the HUGE surge in live secretary upskirt cam websites this product will enable.

Hell, there'll be so many, it'll simultaneously turn around the tech slump AND drive us all to IPv6.

Until, of course, someone mistakenly installs 10,000 of these babies in the server room. All those geeks...<shudder>

--
Carousel is a lie!

cool by JeanBaptiste · 2003-03-13 02:05 · Score: 5, Funny

but dead flies are smaller, cheaper, and in greater abundance :)

Pulls over 200 mills! by rabryn · 2003-03-13 02:09 · Score: 4, Insightful

This is a great product but it pulls over 200 mills, not so great for low power embedded work.

Re:Pulls over 200 mills! by Matt_Bennett · 2003-03-13 03:12 · Score: 4, Informative

You're going to have a hard time doing a 100Mbit interface that is truly "low power." With 100Mbit, there is always something going over the link, putting +/- 1V over a 100 ohm load, counting inefficiences, you're probably at 40 mA just to support the TX portion of the PHY. Then you have to realize that you need a 125 MHz clock going on inside-and that's all before you have a MAC and a processor going. Ethernet (particularly 100Mb) is not a low power interface.

Re:Great! by ip_vjl · 2003-03-13 02:18 · Score: 5, Interesting

Why would you need IPv6?

Are you planning on making your fridge world visible? If not, your appliances could all sit behind NAT and you'd still only need a single IP address for your entire house.

I wouldn't want to get home and find out I've been H4X0R3D and have a freezer full of rotten food, so I don't think I'd ever give them world visible addresses.

--

Not that IPv6 is a bad thing, but this probably wouldn't significantly grow the total number of world routable addresses much, as they'd be on private nets.

Re:I'm wondering by Cyberdyne · 2003-03-13 02:22 · Score: 4, Interesting

How about eatable RFID embedded in food, someone ?

I don't know about edible, but I do like this idea; for most fruit, you could embed the tag in the skin, for example. I'd actually really like to be able to get a list of stuff in the fridge, be warned when something's approaching the eat-by date...

Better still: some RFID tags have sensors in. A simple Perl script could track a shopping list for me, and either order replacements online or be synced to a PDA for shopping. Maybe even couple it with a Pricewatch-type site, so I know which supermarket would be cheapest for that particular list; work out what recipe I could make, or what I'd need to add.

Alternatively - if this device can do 300 Kbit/sec in this version, how about cable-modem/ADSL routers? Up the bandwidth a bit, it would handle the load OK; as it is, it could make a nice easy dialup router. $33 with a serial port - add a simple modem, and you have the ultimate plug+play ISP: one end in the phone socket, the other in the NIC, and it's all preconfigured!

Proof at last! by docbrown42 · 2003-03-13 02:23 · Score: 5, Funny

Imagine being able to check on the temparature of your fridge over the internet. Even install a web cam inside it.

That would be SO cool! I'd finally be able to get the PROOF of the existance of the little guy who turns on and off the light in my fridge!

--
Ed Wedig
Graphic design services
docbrown.net

That's not a 16 port hub by cyber_rigger · 2003-03-13 02:27 · Score: 5, Funny

It's my Beowulf Cluster. :^)

Re:I'm wondering by walt-sjc · 2003-03-13 02:31 · Score: 4, Informative

Any sane manufacturer is not going to add a $33 part to a $70 VCR. This is completely the wrong application. Frankly, VCR's already have a decent enough CPU
to web enable them for much less money than this part - like $3 for a single chip ethernet interface.

Think of a webcam or something where you take that part, this, and bingo, webcam, front-door intercom, etc. Considering the price of similar items on the market, this still seems very expensive for lower-end applications.

Re:Question by EnglishTim · 2003-03-13 02:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

I think the idea is that people who produce things like TVs, Refrigerators, water heaters etc... could easily intergrate these things into their products for a minimal cost. So, you can have your iRefrigerator and plug a network cable in it, and it can now email you when it runs out of ice, or someone leaves the door open, or it needs de-icing. You could point your webserver at it and get a reading of the current temperature, how much ice it has etc...

You could put these things in drink kiosks so that they can email you when they're almost out of Dr. Pepper.

I can't see why you'd want one in a toaster, though...

Yes it is a web server by IWannaBeAnAC · 2003-03-13 02:39 · Score: 5, Informative

From the product description link, helpfully included in the main story...

Although it is smaller than your thumb, the XPort contains all of the hardware and software required to Web-enable any device, including:

10Base-T/100Base-TX auto-sensing Ethernet connection
Mature, robust operating system
Embedded HTTP-compliant Web server
Programmable e-mail alerts
Extensive networking protocol suite including full TCP/IP stack
128-bit AES Rijndael encryption

In perspective.. by nolife · 2003-03-13 02:50 · Score: 5, Interesting

Downside is that the serial interface to the controller tops out at 300 kbps, but for $33 (in 10K quantities) it's a cool, easy way to net-enable just about anything."

The size is a big factor but there are already full blown devices that can do far more then this and are cheaper. Take a look at some DSL/Cable routers. Siemens sells one that is a 10/100 4 port switch, web interface and control, printer port, firewall, etc... for $19 and $28. Many SMC barricades and Linksys models are going for under $40. These devices might not fit into a toaster but I know they could be made smaller. I know comparing these to the articles product is not apples to apples but there are cheaper and more robust web and network enabled devices already out on the street.

--
Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.

Re:Great! by le_jfs · 2003-03-13 02:51 · Score: 5, Funny

I want one!
I can't wait to code a MUD (multi-user dungeon) for my fridge!

~$ telnet fridge.home user: le_jfs password: ********* Welcome inside your fridge! It's dark. It's cold. You can hear a little hum coming from everywhere. command> open door The door is now open. Magically, the light turned on. You can see a path to the kitchen south. command> look The fridge contains a ten-days-opened bottle of milk, some ham and some cheese. command> look cheese It's greenish. command> put cheese in bin. The Cheese screams in terror. He resides now in the bin. command> look ham It's bluefish. It has some activity on it. A fly probabily layed eggs on it. You are hungry. command> wield knife You are now armed with a knife. You are hungry. You are cold. command> kill ham with knife You attack the ham with a knife. The ham strafes and ignores you. You attack the ham with a knife. The ham takes a cut and cries. You attack the ham with a knife. The ham flees south command> go south You are now in the kitchen. There is some ham in bad condition lying on the floor. command> kill ham with knife You attack the ham with a knife. The ham begs you to stop. It really hurts. You attack the ham with a knife. The ham dies with a tremendous 'Aaaaarg'. You won. You are hungry. command> go shopping.

--
main(char O){O++&&(((O-291)*O+27788)*O-868020?1:putchar(O++) )&&main(O);}

Re:Question by Croaker · 2003-03-13 02:52 · Score: 4, Informative

You'd need additional hardware to wire up something like a toaster, which itself generally doesn't have electronics in it. Web enabling your toaster is a bit of hyperbole.

However, as a home user, you could bash together something with these. Say you have an electronic thermometer that has a serial output. Attach one of these doodads and voila! You now have a web-enabled thermomemter. Stick it in the toaster. Now your toaster is web-enabled! (err... sorta) I can't think of many common appliances around that have serial ports on them. I guess my TiVo is the only one I can think of, that I own.

These are aimed at the manufacturer of the thermometer, however. They could take the existing design that has a serial port, add in one of these modules, and release their new iThermometer that's networkable, at a low engineering cost. They can probably tag $100 onto the price, easily swallowing the $33/module cost and making themselves a nice profit in addition. There's tons of industrial equipment out there that has serial ports, which means they need to be within 30 feet or so of a PC. With these, you can have a whole network of machines tying into a single PC which is capable of monitoring an entire factory.

I suspect any manufacturer of actual web-enabled coffeemakers, toasters, etc. would skip the serial interface (and $33 overhead) and instead just get some off-the-shelf integrated TCI/IP chip.

Personally, I'd love to get one of these things and web-enable my old Apple //c (although this particular model is a bit pokey at 300 baud).

Good point. by torpor · 2003-03-13 03:25 · Score: 4, Insightful

Sorry, but in this business "$30/piece" is *NOT* cheap.

Wake me up when they're selling them at $1 a piece in quantities of 10k, then we'll see a revolution ...

--
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --

Re:Good point. by Tackhead · 2003-03-13 06:53 · Score: 4, Insightful

> This wouldn't appear in a Roper (about a 4% margin), but more likely a Kennmore Elite or Maytag Neptune. A refrigertator with online access to temperature and enegry usage graphs is more likely to be a $3999 SubZero than a $399 GE. The good thing about this product is that as more people use it, pricing will drop and it will work its way down to mid-range products where the margins are thinner.
And more to the point - it allows you to sell $399 fridge without an energy usage graph, or the exact same fridge, but with a CD-ROM and an Ethernet jack, so that you can view the energy graph from your PC, for $699, you've just made $300 on $33 worth of parts. That's a great way for fridgemakers to boost margins too :)

Re:Great! by Mr.+Bad+Example · 2003-03-13 03:36 · Score: 5, Funny

I wouldn't want to get home and find out I've been H4X0R3D and have a freezer full of rotten food

All your bouillabaisse are belong to us.

-1 Misinformed: $100 to use that $30 module by KalvinB · 2003-03-13 03:40 · Score: 4, Insightful

According to the site it's $100 for the SDK KIT which makes that $30 module useful. The xPort is an all in one solution for $50.

$130 vs $50. SitePlayer is far more expensive and far less attractive as far as the packaging.

Ben

--
Work Safe Porn

They are available in quantities below 10,000 by cvanhorn · 2003-03-13 03:56 · Score: 4, Informative

According to their website here: http://www.lantronix.com/news/pr/2003/02-24-xport. html they are available in single unit quantities for $49.00.

Slashdot Mirror

Web Server Packed into RJ45 Connector

36 of 438 comments (clear)